A five-year-long lawsuit from Waterville USA is over after both parties filed a joint request to dismiss the case with no chance of refiling.
Waterville, the Gulf Shores waterpark on Hwy. 59, …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
A five-year-long lawsuit from Waterville USA is over after both parties filed a joint request to dismiss the case with no chance of refiling.
Waterville, the Gulf Shores waterpark on Hwy. 59, sued termite protection group Terminix in February 2021, alleging negligence and failing to fulfill a termite inspection contract, according to case details from Alabama court records. Waterville has contracted with Terminix since 2005.
In the complaint, Waterville alleged Terminix and its employees did not inspect the entirety of the waterpark premises for termites.
In 2021, termite activity and/or damage was reported on the property and Waterville filed a lawsuit on counts of fraud, fraudulent suppression and concealment, breach of warranty, negligence (including negligence per se), wantonness, breach of contract and negligent training, supervision and retention.
“Waterville has learned that due to the scope of the termite damage found throughout its property, in accordance with building codes of Gulf Shores, Alabama, that several buildings will be required to be declared a total loss and that they will need to be rebuilt,” the complaint reads.
Waterville requested a trial before jury, which was set for March 2022 but was canceled a month before it was to take place.
In November 2025, Waterville filed for an arbitration award for a little more than $6 million, and a hearing was set for Jan. 19. On Dec. 16, a motion to withdraw was filed.
A response to the motion was set to go before Baldwin County Circuit Judge J. Byron Brackin at Fairhope Circuit Court on Jan. 26, but the parties did not meet for the court date because Waterville, Terminix and the employees had filed a joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice on Jan. 22, meaning both parties agreed to dismiss the case and will not be able to bring the same case forward again. The next day, the dismissal was granted by Brackin, and on Jan. 26 the case was assigned the status of “disposed."